Jump to content

Bangkok Mar 12-14


bigKus
 Share

Recommended Posts

If that group can grow larger, it would be great.

I would join if I were Thai.

Don’t know that is it true..:roll: I heard EB joined them ( and his Tshirt tells he is a farang )

I didn't mean foreigners could not join. But we don't really matter. More Thais need to join.

Where are the university students? Or any student oriented groups? Their stand might be significant during this political turmoil. I've seen some from the red and shouting "Abhisit get out" etc...I doubt it if you ask them why is that so they cant give any justifications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've been to several 'no colour' rallies.

There are a few other farangs there.

The leader is Dr Tul from Chula - seems like a nice guy. The speeches are pretty low key - less rabble rousing than Pad or UDD - (UDD is the worst in my opinion, but my Thai wasn't as good when I went to PAD - but the tone was more 'civilised')

That picture is genuine - I went to Victory monument yesterday and there were LOADS of people there... way more than that picture shows. I believe the misunderstanding has been because they have held rallies every day... and the crowds have swelled quickly... last Sunday there were about 1000 people - yesterday there were 10,000 or more.

I parked my bike on the outskirts of the meeting and ten minutes later it was completely surrounded by thousands of people. I love the singing - I get quite emotional when they sing - it's really heartfelt and genuine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in one of the videos--i think part two--there is a shotgun shell visible on the ground. a big one. it could have been a 12 gauge or 10 gauge but i suspect it was from an M79. the army has m79s, and they're probably what they use to launch tear gas. the reds are thought to have them as well.

slight update: reliable source indicates that it was the casing from a rubber bullet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This week I've been hearing the government shout the word TERRORIST around a lot, I know they like to use this new power word, it seems like any c*nt with a grudge is called a terrorist these days.

But personally its a bit of a dumb thing for them to have gone shouting about, once whitey hears there are armed TERRORISTS in Central Bangkok, those flights will be getting cancelled hand over fist, best stick to calling them Protestors..... its less intimidating and Arab!

so those guys with black shirts, ski masks and ak 47s are protestors? the ones trying feebly to blow up electric towers, etc? glad that's cleared up.

although i wouldn't use the word terrorist either--i call the first group the ninjas and the ones who failed so epically to topple electric towers i'd just call incompetent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WE ARE SURE WILL WIN! :lol:

No one win... if we still fighting... no one win...

Tell that to Mr.Jomrong as he was a person who said it. Oh, and pls next time if you wanna quote then pls don't just quote it like you did above as it looks like I was the idiot person who said it which was not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in one of the videos--i think part two--there is a shotgun shell visible on the ground. a big one. it could have been a 12 gauge or 10 gauge but i suspect it was from an M79. the army has m79s, and they're probably what they use to launch tear gas. the reds are thought to have them as well.

slight update: reliable source indicates that it was the casing from a rubber bullet.

beej suggested the same thing when we were discussing the vid last week. But rubber projectile I think may be more accurate? And the casing would be the same would it not with rubber or pellets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in one of the videos--i think part two--there is a shotgun shell visible on the ground. a big one. it could have been a 12 gauge or 10 gauge but i suspect it was from an M79. the army has m79s, and they're probably what they use to launch tear gas. the reds are thought to have them as well.

slight update: reliable source indicates that it was the casing from a rubber bullet.

beej suggested the same thing when we were discussing the vid last week. But rubber projectile I think may be more accurate? And the casing would be the same would it not with rubber or pellets.

Rubber bullets look the same as shotgun shells..

Fiocchi_rubber_buckshot.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in one of the videos--i think part two--there is a shotgun shell visible on the ground. a big one. it could have been a 12 gauge or 10 gauge but i suspect it was from an M79. the army has m79s, and they're probably what they use to launch tear gas. the reds are thought to have them as well.

slight update: reliable source indicates that it was the casing from a rubber bullet.

beej suggested the same thing when we were discussing the vid last week. But rubber projectile I think may be more accurate? And the casing would be the same would it not with rubber or pellets.

Rubber bullets look the same as shotgun shells..

Fiocchi_rubber_buckshot.jpg

That is what I understood but I would call them rubber pellets not bullets. But they are generally considered much less potentially lethal than a rubber bullet though I wouldnt want to get one in the eye.

However, the point was that beej stated that a solid, hard rubber projectile (he called it a bullet I think) was fired from the shotgun casing and he highlighted a pic from the Kokwua and linked some info which showed the type of rubber projectiles shot from shotguns. (Check it out from last week and let us know your thoughts)

I would expect rubber bullets were fired from the M-16s, rubber pellets and rubber projectiles from shotguns but not sure about the M79 given it is a large size - unless they fired bean-bag type projectiles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the chaos may emerge a new Thai identity

* Published: 19/04/2010 at 12:00 AM

* Newspaper section: News

The fatal face-off between the red shirts and security forces in which at least 24 people were killed and more than 800 injured is the latest evidence that Thailand's "glory" days have come to an end. The position of power, long dominated by the Bangkok elite, is on the verge of collapsing.

The bloodbath on the Bangkok streets conveyed a firm message to the established institutions that their days of monopolising state power are over. Some local media are reluctant to use the term "civil war" to describe the ongoing brutal confrontations. Whatever one wants to call it, the conflict, with its deep roots in ideological polarisation, is on its way to generating political changes.

Already the violence that has erupted in the course of countless political battles has redefined the essence of the Thai nation. State-crafted national identity is under threat. Apparently, many Thais are in the process of finding a new meaning to being Thai.

Traditionally, Thailand has been a country proud of its perfection. It is the only country in Southeast Asia that successfully escaped colonialism, it is often claimed. The success, as past Thai leaders saw it, was made possible because of the trait of unity imbued in every Thai. This attribute also made some people feel that Thailand is supposedly more superior to its neighbours. This is how many Thai people perceived themselves. It is this same perception exploited by the state as it tried to construct a national identity.

In many ways, Thailand did have "glory" days. Over the past few decades, Thailand, despite being ruled by numerous despotic regimes, has enjoyed a certain level of political stability. The Thai two-faced strategy, being rebranded more appealingly as a shrewd bending-with-the-wind diplomacy, allowed the country to survive various kinds of threat. Political stability was buttressed by long years of impressive economic growth. There is no doubt Thailand is far ahead of its once war-torn neighbours.

It was the period when the political elite began to re-engineer Thailand's national identity, not only as part of identifying the Thai "self" in the face of supposedly inferior neighbours, but also strengthening the regime of the day by setting certain social rules in order to demand social obedience. Thailand became the "Land of Smiles" because Thais were seemingly happy under the benevolence of the elite in Bangkok. The Thai character, as echoed in the Thai national anthem, was strenuously promoted. "Thailand unites the flesh and blood of Thais. This is the nation that belongs to Thais in all respects ...The Thais are peace-loving", so goes the lyrics of the national anthem.

Beneath the Thai smiles, however, political domination in the hands of the Bangkok elite continued. Poor villagers in far-flung regions were told to remain subservient even when they were left in poverty and politically crippled. For many of them, being Thai was to be politically submissive. The leaders in Bangkok made decisions. The perceived uneducated khon ban nok (upcountry residents) followed them. The elite called this a "social contract". All Thais seemed to live happily in unison. Cashing in on this deceitful image, Thailand even declared to the world that they were welcome to come to "Amazing Thailand".

Throughout the Thaksin Shinawatra period, however, the billionaire prime minister shifted the political consensus. He did this with a series of populist programmes, such as cheap universal health care and ample village development funds. In a sense, he managed to put a genuine smile on people's faces, especially those in the North and Northeast regions. During his six-year administration, not only did they taste a more comfortable life, but they were also offered a chance to elect their favourite leader in a ballot box. Suddenly, their political voice became meaningful.

But their smiles seriously threatened the power interests of the Bangkok elite. Three years after the military coup, the Bangkok elite is fighting back against the khon ban nok who are now labelled as simply unintelligent and easily manipulated. The bloody confrontations during the previous weekend revealed that these villagers, in red T-shirts, are no longer subservient. They are seeking to reinvent a national identity of their own. They are eager to reject the top-down process of identity making, while campaigning for a bottom-up way of how Thais should express their nationhood.

The message of the rural residents is clear: a new Thailand with a new identity which is no longer submissive but one in which the Thais know their rights. The relentless demonstrations confirm the emergence of such a new identity which fiercely contests the traditional one created by Bangkok leaders. Occasionally, this new identity allows Thais to behave unconventionally, as seen in the Bangkok riot of April 2009 and the incident last weekend. It also reveals the unattractive truth behind certain Thai images. That is, the Thai nation no longer unites Thai blood and flesh, that this society is not homogeneous but comprises many different races, and that the people profess different political ideologies. They do not need to pretend to be same.

Thailand is now entering a new political landscape. Recent developments strongly suggest the anti-government forces are yearning to rebuild Thai society and make it more equal. While it will be impossible to remove class divisions, they just hope that the rapidly expanding membership of the "underclass" will be able to access politics without state obstruction.

How will this shape the future of Thailand? The state will have to come to terms with the shift in the people's perception of their identity. They will demand their rights and will protest more. The state will be assigned a new responsibility to ensure that their rights are protected, that their welfare is to be improved and that emerging human rights organisations be strengthened.

Thailand has long lived in a fairy tale world in which the supposed ideal of perfection effectively eclipsed the huge differences and fragmentations in society. The deadly conflict between the red shirts and the state authorities may demonstrate the ugliness of the real Thailand. But it also exposes its other side - the side that values the people's love of democracy and a more equal and just society.

Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun is a Fellow at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/36273/from-the-chaos-may-emerge-a-new-thai-identity

Possibly the best best piece about the overall situation. Good to read stuff by people who can actually see the bigger picture and not get bogged down in macro level stuff that are but symptoms of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh... you mean details.

Like names and places and dates?

Yeah... hate those pesky details getting in the way of blithe sweeping statements that package the whole drama into two camps - smug, superior, rich elite vs poor downtrodden, masses yearning to be free.

Good for you...

Yellow = rich, bad people.

Red = poor, good people

Got this whole situation in hand now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thks so much for enlighten me...

How about the protesters on Rachaprasong Rd. I know ppl have right to protest as long as it's peaceful.

If you are the gov. what would you do?

Just call an election - all red protests end!

Perhaps only until the PAD start taking over Airports again.

In the long term the REDs will win anyway.They have so much less to lose so in the very end if things keep going to the extremes it will be the PAD who will lose the most= possible revolution/civil war are only around the corner potentially.

Best to find some ways to appease the REDs while at the same time keeping some control or order to developments.

You simply can not keep the people down forever and it would be far better to make some sort of accommodation with the REDs before the whole nation grows further and further apart.

Pick a date [soon] for the dissolution of the Parliament and hold an election, which you agree to abide by the results.

Don't pick a date set by or demand made by the REDs but rather one a week or so after their minimum demand. Then everyone can get back to the normal chaos of Thailand.

At this stage rights and wrongs do not matter anymore- people are dead and as hard as it is to accept, a new approach is needed. A lot of humility on the part of the PM and his backers would go a long way. The goal now has to be STABILITY.

This will either be from Fascist leaning Pad or some weird composite of vested interests and or a possible coup. Or a populist majority government which at least will try to pander to the REDs with rhetoric about democracy and some other crumbs which can at least allow the reds to imagine that they are on the right path towards democracy and some sort of equality and maybe even economic well being.

Making some sort of accommodation with these people now will be a lot cheaper than the longer it goes on. The yellow shirts need to think very carefully if they want to preserve most of their privileges or risk further instability and the inevitable economic woes that will follow. At this stage it really hardly matters the rights and wrongs of the politics as much as the reality of the politics and the need to COMPROMISE [ or at least be seen to compromise]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh I see...

You mean like the offer of dissolution in 9 months? Or the dissolution in 6 months?

Both dismissed by UDD leaders, who now demand immediate dissolution AND Abhisit to be banished from the kingdom.

(not exactly in keeping with their stated aims - 3) Bringing Thais together in an effort to solve our political and socio-economic problems, recognizing that such efforts must stem from the power of the people.

4) Implementing the rule of law, due process and a system of equal justice for all, free of any obstructions or double-standards.)

An election doesn't solve the problems yet... There are large swathes of the country where Democrat MPs can't campaign as the local UDD chapters will kill them. Isaan and Chiang Mai cannot be relied upon to hold a free and fair election.

And if the Democrats win, the Reds won't accept it - their boss wants to come back for their money.

And if Peua Thai win, they will attempt to bring Thaksin back, whitewashed, and then the **** REALLY hits the fan.

Some funny pics... you can take Rachaprasong, but stay the Hell away from our gogo bars!

http://www.daylife.com/search/photos/1/grid?q=Patpong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yellow = rich, bad people.

Red = poor, good people

Got this whole situation in hand now...

Of course it is a very complex set of problems which this does not justice to. But guess what? The more extremes the situation becomes [and there is at least 20 dead already] what does indeed tend to happen is that everything gets reduced to it's most basic and crude form. Usually with truth being a first casualty and a blame game that becomes a classic zero -sum game.

If you were in fact to break down the situation to its' most crude and basic level then as absurd as it would be to do so then essentially the description you give would actually be the awful core reality.

Assuming we both want to avoid that horrible eventuality then some way will have to be found to bring some common ground back into the center stage and some way explored to at least arrest the further division of Thailand and the total polarization of its. people.

The solutions may turn out to be very ugly and very very annoying, frustrating to say the least but making bold sacrifices in the greater interest of the Thia people and nation will at some point have to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh I see...

You mean like the offer of dissolution in 9 months? Or the dissolution in 6 months?

Both dismissed by UDD leaders, who now demand immediate dissolution AND Abhisit to be banished from the kingdom.

(not exactly in keeping with their stated aims - 3) Bringing Thais together in an effort to solve our political and socio-economic problems, recognizing that such efforts must stem from the power of the people.

4) Implementing the rule of law, due process and a system of equal justice for all, free of any obstructions or double-standards.)

An election doesn't solve the problems yet... There are large swathes of the country where Democrat MPs can't campaign as the local UDD chapters will kill them. Isaan and Chiang Mai cannot be relied upon to hold a free and fair election.

And if the Democrats win, the Reds won't accept it - their boss wants to come back for their money.

And if Peua Thai win, they will attempt to bring Thaksin back, whitewashed, and then the sh*t REALLY hits the fan.

Some funny pics... you can take Rachaprasong, but stay the Hell away from our gogo bars!

http://www.daylife.com/search/photos/1/grid?q=Patpong

One month would be more what I had in mind or just three months.

The idea is to NOT just cave in to the demands of the RED's but rather to rise above the stand off and show that the government is willing to make a major compromise in the spirit of avoiding further polarization.

The idea of not holding an election just because you will not be able to get back into power is hardly a good one. Understandable [wish my own government would do the same ] but in the current situation the stakes have become too high [ in terms of potential loss of human )PRECIOUS) life.

I accept that indeed man bad things can follow this and I don't have an easy solution/s. I just contend that some way badly needs to be found to find common ground and some new ideas need to come forth that will at least try to arrest the polarization and stop even more extremes on both sides. As you live there you are better placed to find such difficult ideas and ways forward or ways to begin the healing process - at least on some levels.

What you describe is what I would guess is/might be the lesser of two evils? And that just maybe there might be a way forward after a certain point if things do indeed go down such a path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering, if this happened to other countries, developed countries, such as USA. UK etc. what the gov. do with the protesters.

The problem with this question is the whole premise of the question. Such a situation as pertains to your country is unique to Thailand - or rather the situation it finds itself in. It could and would never happen in a western democracy, which is not to say they don't have problems with marches and demos etc etc

It is just that there are no direct parallels. What is happening in Thailand is far more deeper and fundamental.

It is actually very complicated so I won't bore you trying to expand on this any further, except to say that in a nutshell, no western country with a democracy worth anything would tolerate for one moment the influence or power that the police but especially the army have within their society.

The army generals and police chiefs are firmly under the control of the civilian authorities and THEY TELL THE ARMY WHAT AND WHEN TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO BE DONE. The Army and Police are there to serve the needs of society/government/nation/people. If half of the stuff that goes on in Thailand was even tried ion the west then the Army chiefs would be made to resign full-stop. There are way too many "generals" and shady military figures with far too much power/influence.

Another way I might make this point about the differences is to suggest that no group or section of society within a western democracy would ever get near to ever taking over or shutting down an international Airport as was done by the PAD for days in 2008.

Also because wealth tends to be distributed [spread around] far more in western countries people are too busy to be going to marches and have better things to be doing with their time or at least most people have enough comfort to not be so put out as to protest on a full time basis. In Thailand, so many people have so little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yellow = rich, bad people.

Red = poor, good people

Got this whole situation in hand now...

Of course it is a very complex set of problems which this does not justice to. But guess what? The more extremes the situation becomes [and there is at least 20 dead already] what does indeed tend to happen is that everything gets reduced to it's most basic and crude form. Usually with truth being a first casualty and a blame game that becomes a classic zero -sum game.

If you were in fact to break down the situation to its' most crude and basic level then as absurd as it would be to do so then essentially the description you give would actually be the awful core reality.

Assuming we both want to avoid that horrible eventuality then some way will have to be found to bring some common ground back into the center stage and some way explored to at least arrest the further division of Thailand and the total polarization of its. people.

The solutions may turn out to be very ugly and very very annoying, frustrating to say the least but making bold sacrifices in the greater interest of the Thia people and nation will at some point have to be made.

The solution is actually very simple. The current gov't has to simply pay the demonstrators more money than they are being payed to demonstrate to go home. It's all a money game with Thaksin. The vote goes to the highest bidder. The demonstrators are being payed to demonstrate. That is their motivation. Give them more money to go home, and they will. Even though this sounds too logical for Thailand, it's the reality.

That is the game Thaksin is playing, and the gov't is trying to play by different rules. Thaksin has shown that the game is won by giving away money, and buying what he wants, even chaos. If the current gov't plays by those same rules, Thaksin will loose. When he is broke, then the game is over, but not before, well, there is another way, but the gov't doesn't have the assasination mentality, as Thaksin does. So the money game currently is the only answer.

Trying to be Democratic in allowing free speech, the right to peacefully demonstrate, and expecting the masses to play by those rules is idealistically right, but that's not the game that's being played. When the current gov't realizes that, and starts playing by the rules Thaksin is playing under, then they will win. The gov't does have more money than Thaksin, and can bankrupt him if they would simply play by his rules. If they don't, they loose, plain, and simple. The people have shown what they respond to best......money, cold hard cash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Red Shirts do not have the right to resort to violence or the threat of violence when they don’t get their way.

They don't have the right to hold Bangkok citizens hostage to their demands.

Abhisit has the Thai constitution (The Law) on his side.

The Thai Army has the authority to remove the Red Shirts using whatever force necessary. If the Red Shirts will not stand down, then the army has no choice but to forcibly remove them.

In a democracy, nobody is above the constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...